http://news.yahoo.com/judge-law-wont-protect-unmarried-victims-rape-012941200.html
Okayy so from what i understand this man goes into a woman's bedroom, pretends to be her boyfriend, and molests her but only gets a 3 year sentence and a retrial? It said it was because of some law that prevented them from calling it rape because she was unmarried or something and that is total BS. Apparently the same thing happened in Idaho in 2010 soo maybe they should change that law? Like what right do a bunch of laws and judges have to say what is rape and what isn't? They shouldn't be able to define what rape/sexual assault/molestation is and i don't understand why it would make a difference if the victim was married or not.
"Prior to the conviction, Schulman had argued Morales believed the sex was consensual because the victim responded to his kisses and caresses, according to the decision."
That is a complete lie because first of all he pretended to be her boyfriend. Second this man entered the home of a woman he doesn't know in the middle of the night, in who's crazy messed up mind thinks that that would be consensual? I guess crazies will think what they want but still he has to have realized what he did was wrong.
Ah! that law is scary. they should def change it, 3 years for rape? it needs to be more like 10 years or more.
ReplyDeleteHow does being married make a difference? It's still rape. That's sickening, I don't know how you could do that to someone and to only get three years... They should get a punishment worse than prison for doing that to an innocent woman.
ReplyDelete